Determining Future Success of College Students2009
Determining Future Success of College Students Paul Oehrlein
Illinois Wesleyan University
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by The Ames
Library, the Andrew W. Mellon Center for Curricular and Faculty
Development, the Office of the Provost and the Office of the
President. It has been accepted for inclusion in Digital Commons @
IWU by the faculty at Illinois Wesleyan University. For more
information, please contact
[email protected]. ©Copyright is
owned by the author of this document.
Recommended Citation Oehrlein, Paul (2009) "Determining Future
Success of College Students," Undergraduate Economic Review: Vol.
5: Iss. 1, Article 7. Available at:
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
Determining Future Success of College Students
Abstract Many people invest a lot of money in order to go to
college with the hope that they will eventually be rewarded with
higher salaries. This paper attempts to determine what aspects of
college are most important in determining the future income of
students. In particular, this paper studies whether GPA is an
important determinant of income as well as whether some majors are
better investments than others after controlling for other factors.
In addition, the effect of math and verbal ability on income and
how they interact with different fields of study are examined. The
data comes from the National Longitudinal Study of Youth database
and OLS regressions are used. The regression results show that
grades, natural ability, and major all significantly affect
income.
This article is available in Undergraduate Economic Review:
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
I. Introduction
The years that students spend in college are perhaps the most
influential years on the rest
of their lives. College students face many different decisions day
in and day out that may
determine how successful they will be in the future. They will
choose majors, decide whether or
not they will play a sport, what clubs to join, whether they should
join a fraternity or sorority,
what classes to take, and how much time to spend studying. It is
unclear what aspects of college
will benefit a person the most down the road. Are some majors
better than others? Is earning a
high GPA important? These are some of the many questions that
college students have. This
paper will determine how the choice of major, GPA, and natural
ability affect income.
Some students will graduate from school, get interesting jobs, and
make a lot of money
soon after graduation, while others will struggle to move ahead in
the working world. Every
student deserves the best chance to be successful after graduation.
Some majors have been
proven to lead to higher incomes than others. Perhaps, students can
increase their chances of
being successful simply by choosing these majors. It is also
possible that some majors are simply
riskier, lead to less pleasurable occupations, or require
particular skills or natural abilities that
only a few people have (Scholz, 1996). Therefore, although these
majors pay higher, they may
not necessarily be a better choice for most people. Another
possibility is that certain majors
attract the brightest students, which could account for the
disparity in pay across majors. This
can be controlled for by comparing the aptitudes of students in
various majors by using
standardized test scores. It is obvious some disciplines lead to
better pay, but it is important to
understand why. If we understand why some majors pay better, then
students will be able to
choose their majors more wisely.
1
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
2
The interaction between ability and major is also important to
consider. Mathematics
might be a high-paying major for those with strong math skills, but
for a person who struggles in
math it will most likely be a poor choice. It is important to find
a major that fits your own
strengths and interests. There is no major that is the best choice
for everyone, but for each
individual there may be a major that is ideal. Each person must
consider their own interests and
abilities in choosing a major instead of going for the one that
pays the most.
Another extremely important aspect of a student’s college
experience is GPA. Many
employers use a student’s GPA in order to judge job applicants. It
is often easier to get a good
job with better grades during college (Rumberger, 1997). However,
employers also desire traits
such as leadership which cannot be measured quantitatively.
Students often have to decide how
much time to spend studying versus doing other activities such as
sports or clubs. Studying how
important GPA is in determining a graduate’s income will enable
students to better understand
how to manage their time effectively during college. Also, it can
help students to decide
between taking an easy class to boost GPA and taking a more
challenging class to gain more
knowledge. Hopefully, the benefits from taking more challenging
classes will be greater in the
long run.
This paper will study the effect of a student’s college GPA, major,
and standardized test
scores in order to see what is most influential on future income.
The answer will help students
make crucial decisions that will greatly affect the rest of their
lives and give them the best
opportunity to succeed.
II. Literature Review
Over the course of the past several decades, there have been many
studies that have
estimated how ability, grades, and major affect income. However,
very few papers have studied
2
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
3
all of these characteristics together in a single model. Also, the
interaction between ability and
choice of major has not been studied specifically. All aspects of a
student’s college experience
are linked, so the connection between ability, GPA, and major
should be examined so that the
results can be useful for everyone. This paper will build on
previous research that has examined
the post-graduation income of college students in order to
determine what is most important.
Several papers have focused on the importance of college major in
determining income.
Peter Arcidiacono (2004) studies the reasons for ability sorting
across majors and the different
returns to various college majors on income. Ability sorting across
majors is when some majors
attract students of a higher ability, on average, than other
majors. In order to test whether ability
sorting accounts for the disparity in wages across fields of study,
Arcidiacono uses a dynamic
model between college choice and major choice. He finds, “Virtually
all ability sorting is
because of preference for particular majors in college” (2004,
p.369). This is an interesting
finding, because it shows that students choose their major based
primarily on what subject they
are interested in rather than what career will pay the most.
Perhaps, if students are given more
information about the differences in pay across majors, they will
choose differently. After
controlling for ability, Arcidiacono finds that “large earnings
premiums exist for certain majors”
(p.371). This is a very important finding because it shows that the
difference in pay across
majors is not entirely due to varying ability levels. Clearly,
there are other aspects of majors that
lead to different salaries.
Dan Scholz (1996) presents theory relating to risk-aversion to
explain why certain majors
pay higher than others. He argues that some majors are riskier than
other majors because they
have greater variance in pay. There are some people who are very
risk-averse while others are
3
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
4
risk-neutral or even seek risk. People who take on risk must be
paid higher average earnings to
compensate for the risk they are taking.
The cobweb model is used to explain why more technical fields are
riskier. Since
technical fields require specific knowledge and skills, the labor
supply in these fields is fixed.
Thus, changes in the demand for this field will cause much greater
changes in income for the
workers. Also, shifts in demand seem to be much more pronounced in
technical fields, so fields
such as engineering are very risky compared to more general fields.
Scholz (1996) finds that
there is a strong relationship between the average income of
various majors and their risk level.
A couple of papers have found that some majors pay higher wages due
to the types of
skills they teach. “There are two different types of training that
can occur: general training and
specific training.” (Thorson, 2005, pg. 6) Thorson argues specific
training is valuable to a far
smaller number of firms than general training, but employees with a
more specific education
should be paid higher because they are more difficult to substitute
for as long as there is not an
excess supply of qualified workers. For example, a computer
programmer is harder to substitute
for than a writer. A computer scientist can most likely write an
article more productively than a
journalist can write computer programs. This leads to higher pay
for the computer scientist with
specific training. However, general training gives much more labor
market mobility and greater
freedom in career choice. Thorson finds that majors that give more
specific skills lead to higher
pay, which supports the theory. Thomas and Liang (2005) also find
that specific job skills lead
to higher pay and help a person advance further in the workplace.
They find that more specific
jobs also lead to higher percent wage growth for the first four
years after graduation. General
training leads to lower pay, but these workers are rewarded with
greater mobility and can
perhaps develop more specific skills once they enter a desired
career.
4
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
5
Extensive research has also been completed studying the impact of
GPA on future
income. Chia and Miller (2008) use data from the University of
Melbourne in Australia in order
to study the effect of college performance. They find that “the
main determinant of graduates’
starting salaries is the weighted average mark (equivalent to GPA)
they achieve at university”
(pg.18). Since the labor market in Australia is comparable to that
in the U.S., this suggests that
employers use college performance as a key factor in determining
who to hire. College
graduates typically have little or no full-time work experience and
are therefore judged by what
they achieve in school. This means that employers use GPA in order
to screen job applicants.
Thus, applicants who have better grades in college will have the
highest salaries because
employers expect them to have higher potential in the workplace.
Chia and Miller find that test
scores and college major are significant, but not as important as
college performance in
determining income after graduation.
David Wise (1975) studies whether the skills that lead to success
in school also lead to
higher productivity. This paper greatly emphasizes the human
capital theory. Those with the
greatest set of skills will be the most productive, advance in the
workplace, and make the most
money. Wise finds that college performance is related to future
income, but non-academic
characteristics are also important. Skills such as leadership and
interpersonal skills are not
measured by GPA, but are a vital element of human capital. The
study finds that college
performance can increase income, but the results are not nearly as
strong as the results from Chia
and Miller (2008). This suggests that human capital theory also
supports the notion that better
grades will lead to higher income, but grades are not a perfect
measure of human capital.
There is support for the human capital theory in Thomas (2000) and
Smart (1988) as
well. Both studies find that college performance leads to higher
earnings after graduation.
5
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
6
Thomas studies the effects immediately after graduation, which
lends support to the longer term
results of Chia and Miller (2008). Smart includes variables, such
as playing a sport and joining a
Greek organization, which measure aspects of a student’s college
experience other than grades
and choice of major. The results support Wise (1975) by finding
that both GPA and other college
experiences affect income. Smart and Wise both study earnings more
than ten years after
graduation, so the results support the theory that human capital is
reflected in GPA and
significantly affects income. Although there are non-academic
skills that are vital to performance
in the workplace, grades appear to be a fair measure of a person’s
human capital, and human
capital theory suggests that grades will have a positive effect on
income.
Barry Gerhart (1988) uses data from a specific firm in order to
study the effect of college
performance as well as college major in determining salary
differences between genders.
Gerhart finds that “college major explains most of the difference
in salaries between men and
women” (pg. 14). This result is interesting, because it suggests
that personal preferences account
for a large portion of the different earnings across majors. Based
on the theory of compensating
wage differentials, careers that are more enjoyable will pay less
than those which may be more
stressful or demanding (Becker, 1993). Some people may prefer a
more demanding job with
higher pay, while others may prefer a more pleasurable or rewarding
job with lower pay.
Personal preferences and occupational differences could explain a
large amount of the
differences in pay across careers and majors.
Boissiere, Knight, and Sabot (1985) study the impact of reasoning
skills on income.
They use data from Kenya and Tanzania and find that “cognitive
skills are the most important
form of human capital” (pg. 1020) Cognitive skills are essentially
the ability to learn and acquire
knowledge. This means that people who have greater natural ability
will be able to gain more
6
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
7
human capital and eventually be much more productive. This suggests
that it is very important
to have some measure of natural ability or thinking skills when
studying factors affecting
income. The study finds that math ability, in particular, leads to
higher levels of income.
Although the SAT has been shown to be affected by human capital
acquired through education,
it is the best available measure for natural ability. Therefore,
test scores will be considered very
important in this paper, along with college major and GPA.
As a whole, the previous research strongly supports that grades,
natural ability, and
choice of major greatly affect post-graduate earnings for college
students. These factors will be
further tested in this paper.
III. Theoretical Framework
The theory in this paper builds on of the previous literature with
a focus on human capital
concepts. Statistics have shown that there are large differences in
wages across majors. What
are the theoretical reasons that cause these differences to occur?
The differences in ability across
majors, the differences in risk, and compensating wage
differentials all help to explain the effect
of major on income.
It is possible that there are differences in ability between
certain majors. Perhaps some
majors attract stronger students or are simply more difficult to
gain entrance into. Higher ability
or skills should lead to increased production and higher incomes.
Also, higher ability will enable
a person to acquire human capital more quickly once they enter a
certain profession (Boissiere,
1985). Therefore, the worker’s production will be further
increased, which will lead to even
higher incomes. This process that will enable the brightest workers
to earn significantly more
7
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
8
than those with lower abilities. Therefore, majors that have higher
ability levels amongst their
students will likely appear to pay better.
It is also very important to consider the interaction between
specific skills and
occupation. Ability may have a stronger impact on income for some
majors than for others.
Certainly, having math skills should be more important for a
mathematician than a writer or
artist. Therefore, it is useful to compare the relationship between
math ability and income in
math related fields and non-related fields. The same can be done
for verbal skills. There are
likely both general and specific benefits for having certain
skills. The general benefits of math
skills, for example, will affect everyone regardless of their
field. The more specific benefits of
the skills will apply only to those who enter math-related fields.
By interacting ability and
major, it is possible to better measure both the general and
specific effects of ability on income.
A students GPA should positively affect income as well. Therefore,
if some majors tend
to have students with higher GPA’s this could account for some of
the disparity in income. This
is supported by the screening theory as well as the human capital
theory. The screening theory
argues that employers decide who to hire largely based on college
GPA. This is because
students typically have very limited work experience when they
graduate, so grades are the best
measure of an applicant’s potential productivity (Chia and Miller,
2008). Therefore, students
with better grades will be offered better jobs coming out of
college and make more money.
Based on human capital theory, I argue that GPA is a measure of a
student’s acquired skills and
knowledge. Students with better grades will have acquired more
knowledge and human capital,
so they will perform better in the workplace. This increased
performance will allow them to
move ahead quickly and earn more money. Based on these theories,
students with higher GPA’s
8
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
9
should earn higher salaries immediately after graduation and also
see greater salary increases
during their careers.
There are several other theories that explain why certain majors
are higher paying. Some
argue that certain majors pay better because they are riskier
(Scholz, 1996). This is because those
who are willing to take on more risk must be paid a premium to
compensate. Also, it is possible
that certain majors, such as medical or engineering fields, attract
better students because they are
more challenging and harder to gain acceptance into. Therefore,
these majors will have higher
average salaries due to the fact that students have higher
abilities.
Also, certain majors, such as engineering or computer science, give
more specific
training and this makes these graduates more desirable (Thorson,
2005). This is based on the
Cobb-Web Theory, which shows that the supply of labor for specific
jobs reacts very slowly in
comparison to the labor demand in these markets. For example, the
supply of engineers is based
on the number of engineering students in college and current
engineers. Therefore, the number
of engineers is essentially set for the next four years. If there
is a sudden increase in demand for
engineers, there will be a shortage of engineers, so they will
receive much higher salaries. This
will cause many more people to become engineering majors, but it
will take years for this to
affect the supply of labor in the market thereby lowering
engineering wages. By that time, the
demand for engineers may decrease, which would cause salaries to
decrease dramatically from
when the students started college. The job-specific markets can
change rapidly, which leads to
higher pay for individuals with those skills, but as a return for
risk taking. This is illustrated by
Figure 1, which shows how the supply of engineers can lead to large
fluctuations in the wage
level. Although the wage level may be lower at times for specific
fields, the average wages must
be higher to compensate for the risk.
9
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
10
Figure 1:
In addition, compensating wage differentials may explain a large
portion of the disparity
in wages across majors. Some majors may lead to more pleasurable or
less demanding
occupations than other majors. Some workers favor jobs that are
more enjoyable and are willing
to accept less salary. Other people prefer a job that is more
demanding, provided that they are
paid more. Therefore, the theory of compensating wage differentials
suggests that more
demanding or stressful occupations will have higher incomes than
occupations which are more
enjoyable or have better benefits (Becker, 1993). An example is a
teacher that accepts a lower
salary, because they enjoy working with children and do not have to
work during the summer.
Therefore, some majors may lead to higher incomes, because they
lead to more demanding or
stressful occupations.
My research hypothesis is that higher natural ability as measured
by test scores, higher
GPA, and certain college majors will all lead to significantly
higher post-graduate income. Test
scores and GPA are proxies for an individual’s human capital and
should be directly related to
10
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
11
income after graduation. However, even after controlling for test
scores and GPA, income could
differ across disciplines because of differences in risk or due to
compensating wage differentials.
IV. Data and Empirical Model
The data comes from the National Longitudinal Study of Youth
(NLSY_97), which
started in 1997. This gives variables such as college major,
college GPA, SAT scores, and
income. It also gives controls for race, gender, age, work
experience, and highest grade
completed. The NLSY_97 surveyed about 9000 youth, aged 13 to 17 in
1997, released annually
from 1997 through 2006. The survey covers a large range of details,
including education and
income variables.
The data for income, age, work experience, highest SAT scores, and
highest grade
completed comes from the 2006 survey, which contains the most
recent data available. The
GPA variable uses data collected from all the survey years and
averaged in order to measure the
cumulative college GPA of each student. The GPA variable was only
computed for students
who were graded on a 4.0 scale. The variable is only for college
classes and takes into
consideration every class they took. If a student attended more
than one college, the GPA
combines the classes from all the schools they attended. Most of
the respondents were around 26
years old in 2006, so they had graduated four or five years
earlier, on average.
The study only includes individuals who completed their
baccalaureate, but did not go on
to graduate school. This means that the results may not be
applicable for those who intend go
beyond an undergraduate degree. This was necessary because most of
the individuals that went
on to graduate school were only working part-time or their current
occupations did not accurately
11
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
12
reflect their future occupations. Only full-time workers were
included in the study, so that
outliers do not affect the results.
In order to measure the effect of college major, dummy variables
were created for each of
the 20 most common college major choices in the data set. For
example, if a student is an
engineering major then a 1 is entered as the value for engineering
for the student. If the student
is not an engineering major, then a 0 is entered. The most recent
response for choice of major
was used to create the college major variable. If a student last
reported a major in 2004 then the
major reported in that year was used. Dummy variables were also
created for race and gender.
Age is the person’s age at the time of the 2006 survey. Work
experience is the number of years
of full-time work the person had completed by 2006. Table 1
summarizes the important
variables in the data and shows average income, GPA, and test
scores for each major.
Table 1 shows that the average income, GPA, and test scores vary
across majors. The
major with the lowest average income is home economics, which is
about $3,300 below the
overall average. Computer science majors earn the most and have an
average income more than
$6,400 above the overall average. This appears to be a very large
difference. The highest
average GPA belongs to math and the lowest belongs to home
economics. No major has an
average GPA that differs from the overall average by more than .19.
This suggests that the
GPA’s are fairly similar across majors. The average SAT scores
range from 363 to 629 so there
are clearly different ability levels across majors. This shows that
it is very important to include
SAT scores in the empirical model. The data shows that ability
varies more between majors than
GPA, which suggests that grades are somewhat normalized within
disciplines. Hence, some
majors may be more competitive or challenging than others.
12
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
13
Table 1:
Comparison of Average Income, Average GPA, and Average SAT Scores
for Each Major
Major Average
Computer Science $35,973 3.015 571.51 537.79 152
Criminology $30,652 2.992 448.68 477.63 96
Economics $31,905 3.133 629.41 588.24 32
Education $27,488 3.101 493.50 500.00 218
Engineering $35,639 3.179 595.83 553.13 152
English $26,911 3.222 562.96 609.26 62
Art $27,166 3.183 564.10 576.92 127
History $29,337 3.232 552.78 616.67 47
Home Economics $26,431 2.898 363.81 380.47 33
Math $28,832 3.274 622.73 559.09 33
Nursing $30,946 3.140 531.75 522.22 129
Health $31,331 3.106 535.96 530.70 121
Physics $27,637 3.077 571.88 550.00 40
Political Science $28,553 3.160 573.68 580.77 63
Psychology $27,304 3.200 554.08 579.59 141
Sociology $27,996 2.967 486.59 508.54 62
Total $29,531 3.086 541.32 539.98 3479
Table 1 gives some other very interesting statistics. Psychology is
above average
when it comes to GPA, SAT math, and SAT verbal scores but shows a
total income of more than
$2,300 below average. This suggests that the major may be causing
the lower incomes.
13
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
14
Business on the other hand, has below average GPA, math, and verbal
statistics, but its average
income is the third highest. Perhaps, choosing business as a major
leads to higher incomes.
Comparing math to engineering gives similar results. Math majors
have better grades and test
scores than engineering majors, but they have far lower incomes.
The regression will test
whether these high paying majors are truly better investments or if
there are other causes for the
disparity in income. It is important to note that these results do
not take into account those who
went on to graduate school. Majors such as math, psychology, and
biology may be good choices
for those who intend to further their education.
The empirical model will use an ordinary least squares regression
to test the research
hypothesis. The model will be in the form of a linear
regression:
Income = a + ß1(GPA) + ß2(Major) + ß3(SAT Math) + ß4(SAT Verbal) +
ß5(Work Exp) +
ß6(Race) + ß7(Female) + ß8(Age) + u
Using a linear regression will make it possible to estimate exactly
how much each variable
affects income. For example, the coefficient for each major will
predict exactly how much
annual income will be gained or lost simply by choosing that major
in comparison to the omitted
major, Art. The coefficient for GPA will predict how much
additional income is created from a
one point increase in GPA and the coefficient for SAT math and
verbal will estimate the increase
in annual income from a one point improvement in the respective
test score. Linear models have
been used in several previous papers done on the subject and have
been quite successful.
(Gerhart 1988; Rumberger 1993; Scholz 1996)
Variables and their expected signs:
Income (Dependent): Income will be measured as the total income
each respondent earned
through their own wages and salary during 2006. It includes all
respondents that worked at least
14
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
15
1,500 hours during that year, so it is composed of full time
workers. Typically, the natural log of
income is used in measuring earnings. However, in this data set
there are no respondents that
reported earnings of over $150,000, so there is not an extremely
long tail on the upper income
side of the distribution. The regressions run with income had a
higher r-squared than the
regressions run with the log of income. Therefore, income was used
as the dependent variable.
College major (+/-): Some majors should lead to higher pay, such as
engineering and computer
science, while other majors should be associated with lower
salaries. A series of dummy
variables was created, one for each major studied. For each
respondent, a 1 denotes the student
reported that major, a 0 denotes they did not study under that
major. The variable Other
represents those who were not in any of the specific majors
mentioned. Art was chosen to be the
excluded major from the regression.
College GPA (+): A higher GPA should lead to higher starting
salaries and better workplace
performance, which will lead to even higher salaries. This variable
was cumulative and
measured on a 4 point scale.
SAT Math (+): A higher SAT Math score indicates stronger math
abilities, which should lead to
increased productivity and higher income. The scores range from
200-800, with 800 being the
highest possible score.
SAT Verbal (+) : Better verbal skills should also lead to better
work performance, but results
from the literature show that verbal skills are not as important as
math skills. The scores range
from 200 to 800.
Gender (+/-): Men are expected to make more money than women. Some
reasons are
differences in work experience, hours worked, and possible gender
discrimination. A 1 denotes
a female in the data and a 0 denotes a male.
15
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
16
Race (+/-): Earnings may also be affected by race, because of
differences in experience and
possible discrimination. This is also a series of dummy variables.
The groups included are
Black, Native American, Asian, and Hispanic. Non-Hispanic white are
the excluded group. A 1
is used to describe the person of that race, whereas a 0 means they
are not the respective race.
Age (+) : Income should increase with age as a person gains
knowledge and experience as well
as the opportunity to advance in the workplace, but human capital
theory suggests that it will
increase at a decreasing rate. However, since this paper uses
employees who are very close in
age, the effect should be nearly linear. This variable is measured
in years at the time of the
survey.
Work Experience (+): Experience allows a person to develop
additional skills, which should
increase productivity and income. This is measured in years of work
experience.
A separate regression will be run to test the interaction between
math and verbal ability
and being in a related major. This regression will test whether
math ability is has a stronger
impact on earnings for those in math-related majors and if verbal
ability has added importance
for those in verbal-related majors. The empirical model will use an
ordinary least squares
regression to test the research hypotheses. The model will be in
the form of a linear regression:
Income = a + ß1(SAT Math) + ß2(Math Int) + ß3(Math Major) + ß4(SAT
Verbal) +
ß5(Verbal Int) + ß6(Verbal Major) + ß7(Work Exp) + ß8(Race)+
ß9(Female)+ ß10(Age) +u
This regression will use interaction variables that were not in the
previous regression. The
SAT math variable will still be the actual SAT mathematics
component score. The math
interaction variable will be a person’s SAT math score if they are
in a math-related field, but a 0
will be entered if they are not in a math field. Due to the high
correlation between major and the
interaction variables, the majors will be grouped into math majors,
verbal majors, and other
16
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
17
majors. The math majors are engineering, physics, mathematics,
economics, and business. The
verbal majors are English, history, and sociology. The other majors
will be the omitted group.
This will also be a linear regression, so the results will
determine exactly how much each
variable affects income. For someone in a math related field, the
expected effect on income from
an additional point on the SAT math will be the sum of the
coefficients for the SAT math and the
math interaction variables. For a person not in a math related
field, the expected effect on
income from an additional point on the SAT math will be represented
by the coefficient for that
variable. The interaction variable will only affect those in fields
related to that subject. The
same holds true for SAT verbal and verbal interaction variables.
The coefficients for math major
and verbal major will represent the predicted effect on income
simply by choosing a major in a
field related to the respective skill.
Variables and Their Expected Signs:
Income (Dependent): Same as in the previous model.
SAT Math (+): The actual SAT mathematics component score. A higher
SAT Math score
indicates stronger math abilities, which should lead to increased
productivity and higher income.
The scores range from 200-800, with 800 being the highest possible
score.
Math Int (+): This variable represents the interaction between
ability and choice of field. If a
person is in a math-related field; Business, Computer Science,
Economics, Engineering,
Mathematics, and Physics; their SAT Math score is entered. If a
person is not in a related field, a
0 is entered. Math ability should have additional benefits for
those in related fields.
Math Major (+/-): Math-related fields may lead to significantly
higher or lower incomes. A 1
is entered for those in math-related fields, and a 0 is entered for
those in other majors.
17
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
18
SAT Verbal (+) : The actual SAT verbal component score. Better
verbal skills should also lead
to better work performance, but results from the literature show
that verbal skills are not as
important as math skills. The scores range from 200 to 800.
Verbal Int (+): Since verbal skills should be more important in
related fields, there should a
positive interaction between verbal ability and major. For those in
verbal-related fields; English,
History, Sociology; the SAT verbal score is entered. For those in
other fields, a 0 is entered.
Verbal Major (+/-): It is possible that choosing a verbal related
field will have either a negative
or positive effect on income. A 1 is entered for those in
verbal-related fields and a 0 for those in
other majors.
The control variables will be computed in the same method as the
previous regression and have
the same expected signs.
V. Results
The results of the first regression were very significant. As a
whole, the empirical model
is significant at the .001 level and has an adjusted R-squared of
.374. The regression had many
significant variables with the expected signs. Many of the majors
were highly significant as
were several of the control variables. This implies that there are
several aspects of college that
significantly affect income.
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
19
Psychology 15.2 .006
Sociology 3730.6 1.105
Other 3471.9 1.517
*Indicates Significance at the .10 level **Indicates Significance
at the .05 level ***Indicates Significance at the .01 level
19
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
20
F-Statistic 21.424
N 967
*Indicates Significance at the .10 level **Indicates Significance
at the .05 level
***Indicates Significance at the .01 level
College Major Variables: The results of the regression found that
seven of the majors
significantly impact income when compared to choosing Art.
Business, Communications,
Computer Science, Criminology, Engineering, Nursing, and Political
Science majors all had
20
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
21
significant positive effects on post-graduate income, with
Business, Computer Science, and
Engineering being the most significant. The other thirteen college
majors were not found to have
a statistically significant impact on income. This supports the
idea the choice of major is
important in determining how much money a student will make after
graduation.
The coefficients for each major can be interpreted as the amount of
annual income that is
gained or lost by choosing that major compared to choosing Art as a
major. For example, the
coefficient for engineering is more than 10,500 in the regression,
so that means that being an
engineering major will increase one’s predicted income by about
$10,500 every year compared
to the omitted group. That is a lot of extra money to earn every
year after college. Interpreting
the other coefficients finds that business majors make
approximately $7,600 more, nursing
majors make about $6,700 more, and computer science majors make
over $8,700 more every
year by choosing the respective major . If these wage gaps across
majors stay the same over
time, during the next 20 years an engineering major will make an
extra $210,000 simply because
they chose engineering. Although in present value terms the amount
is smaller and the affect of
major on income will vary for each person, these results suggest
that the choice of major could
be extremely important for an individual in terms of lifetime
earnings.
On the other hand, majors such as art lead to lower incomes than
other majors. Art majors
have the lowest expected earnings followed by psychology majors,
biology majors, and history
majors. This implies that when a student chooses a major such as
art or psychology, either they
are unaware of the lower expected income associated with the field
or they are willing to
sacrifice that amount of income in order to still work in the
field. Therefore, the difference in
wages across majors is likely due to either compensating wage
differentials or a lack of
information given to college students.
21
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
22
Since, the data comes from students who recently graduated college,
it is not guaranteed
that the each major will have the same impact on income later in a
person’s career. It is possible
that a major such as psychology will pay less initially, but will
lead to greater opportunities to
move ahead or find better jobs further down the road. In addition,
there are different proportions
of people from each major that go to graduate school. These results
only apply to those who do
not go to graduate school and there may be some selection bias if
the top students from some
majors tend to go to graduate school. For example, many biology
majors go to medical school
and may have high incomes as doctors, but they are not included in
the regression.
GPA Variable: The results show that college GPA is a very
significant determinant of
income. The GPA coefficient is significant at the .01 level. Also,
the coefficient is about 3980
in the model, which means that a one point increase in GPA leads to
around $3,980 more in
salary every year. Clearly, working hard in school pays. An “A”
student makes approximately
$4,000 more than a “B” student and $8,000 more than a “C” student
every year. These results
come from workers who recently graduated, so this most strongly
supports the human capital
theory. Employers use grades as a tool to judge applicants, so
students with higher GPA’s are
likely to get better jobs. Also, it implies that those who did well
in school and studied hard
perform better in the workplace. Therefore, GPA appears to be a
fair measure of human capital
after graduation.
SAT Variables: The results for the math and verbal variables are
very interesting. The
SAT math variable is significant in the regression, but the SAT
verbal variable is insignificant.
This supports the previous research. It implies that math ability
is much more important than
verbal or linguistic skills in most occupations. The results also
suggest that math ability is more
directly linked to acquiring human capital than verbal ability. The
coefficient for the SAT math
22
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
23
variable is above 10 in the regression. This means that a student
that scores a 700 on the SAT
math will make over $2,000 more each year on average than someone
that scores a 500. It is
possible that this difference will grow, because those with higher
abilities will be able to gain
human capital at a faster rate throughout their careers. Therefore,
they will become even more
productive than those with less natural ability and the wage
difference will grow. This could be
tested by studying data consisting of older workers than the one
used in this paper.
Control Variables: In the regression, age and work experience
variables were very
significant. The race variables as well as gender were found to be
insignificant in both
regressions. It is promising that the race and gender variables
were insignificant, because it
implies that there is not significant discrimination and also there
are similar opportunities for
everyone. In many studies, these variables have been found to be
significant. Perhaps, since this
uses very recent data, the opportunities for women and minorities
has increased in recent years
while discrimination has decreased. Also, more young women have
chosen to work full-time
and have more work experience which will help improve their
incomes.
The age and work experience variables were both highly significant
and positively
affected income. Work experience was the most significant variable
with a t-statistic of 14.669.
The coefficient implies that income increases by more than $4,600
with every additional year of
work experience. Also, age increases income by an additional $1,500
every year. These
variables both have a very significant impact on earnings shortly
after graduation, but will most
likely have a diminishing effect in the long-run.
The results of the regression involving the interaction variables
were also very
interesting. The regression had an adjusted r-squared of .310. The
math interaction variable was
significant and positive, while the verbal interaction was negative
and insignificant.
23
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
24
Regression 2
F-Statistic 47.5
N 1449
*Indicates Significance at the .10 level **Indicates Significance
at the .05 level
***Indicates Significance at the .01 level
24
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
25
Math Variables: The SAT math coefficient was around 9 in the
regression and was
significant. The math interaction variable was highly significant
and its coefficient was more
than 6. The SAT math coefficient is slightly less than it was in
the previous model, but very
similar. It is most likely smaller because some of its effect is
captured by the interaction
variable. Since the interaction variable had a positive
coefficient, we can infer that math ability
gives higher returns for students in math related majors. A student
in a math major with a 750 on
the SAT math will make about $4,600 more per year than another
student in the same major who
scored a 450. Students who are strong in math will see additional
benefits if they chose a related
field. The dummy variable for math major was insignificant in the
regression, which implies that
students in math fields do not necessarily earn significantly more
or less than those in other
fields. These results all agree with the expected signs.
Verbal Variables: The SAT verbal, verbal interaction, and verbal
major variables were
all insignificant in the regression. This agrees with the previous
regression and the previous
literature. Verbal ability does not appear to be as important in
the workplace as math ability.
Either math ability is a better measure of human capital or it
enables a person to develop human
capital more quickly. The results show the verbal ability does not
significantly affect income,
even for those in verbal-related fields. Also, those who choose
majors related to verbal ability do
not earn significantly more or less than those who choose other
majors.
Other Variables: The results are very similar to the regression run
with the prior model
for most of the variables. GPA, work experience, and age are all
highly significant and
positively affect income. This supports the previous results, the
coefficients were similar to
before, and these appear to be very important determinants of
income. The variables for race,
25
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
26
with the exception of Asians, were still insignificant. The Asian
and Female variables became
significant in the regression that included the interaction
variables, which is very interesting.
The variable for Asian became very significant and positive after
the interaction variables
were added. It is possible that this is due to the higher
proportion of Asians in math-related
fields such as mathematics, computer science, and engineering. The
math major variable was
insignificant and negative, but the Asian variable became
significant and positive. Perhaps, there
is an advantage to choosing a math field which was captured by the
Asian variable because they
are very prominent in math fields. Also, the female coefficient
became negative, which could be
due to the fact that fewer women enter math related fields than
men. Although the variable was
insignificant, it is possible there are advantages for choosing
math majors, particularly for those
strong in mathematics. Also, females are more likely to choose
verbal fields, which may be
lower paying. This may explain why the coefficient for females was
most negative in the
regressions that included the verbal interaction variables. Results
from previous literature have
shown that women earn less money than men, which could be due to
the fields they enter.
Table 4 summarizes the rank of each major based on the regressions
run. The first
column is the rank of majors based only on the true average
post-graduate income of students in
the respective disciplines. This does not include any controls. The
second column gives the rank
of each major after controlling for students’ GPAs. The third
column ranks each field after
controlling for GPA, SAT math, and SAT verbal scores. The fourth
column gives the final
results from the complete regression on the effect of major on
income. The majors are ranked
after GPA, SAT math, SAT verbal, work experience, gender, race, and
age are all controlled for.
26
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
27
Table 4: Ranks of Major by Income after Controlling for Certain
Variables
Major Rank of
Engineering 2 2 5 1
Business 3 3 3 3
Economics 4 5 20 14
Health 5 4 7 9
Nursing 6 7 9 4
Criminology 7 6 2 5
Communications 8 8 6 7
History 9 9 12 18
Math 10 12 8 10
Political Science 11 11 10 6
Sociology 12 10 16 11
Physics 13 13 11 8
Education 14 15 13 16
Psychology 15 16 15 20
Art 16 17 14 21
English 17 19 17 17
Other 18 18 18 12
Home Economics 19 14 4 13
Biology 20 20 19 19
Architecture 21 21 21 15
Some of the majors have about the same rank in each column, while
others vary greatly.
For example, business is ranked third no matter what was controlled
for. On the other hand,
economics is the fourth highest paying major without any controls,
but after controlling for GPA,
27
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
28
SAT math, and SAT verbal its rank dropped to 20th. This stresses
the importance of control
variables. Economics appears to be very high paying if one looks
simply at post-graduate
earnings, but it is likely that the high incomes are due to higher
ability levels rather than the
major being a better choice. The rankings did not change much after
controlling for GPA, which
is due to the fact that GPA’s do not vary much across majors. Test
scores on the other hand vary
greatly, so controlling for ability changed some of the rankings
tremendously. Table 4 is very
useful for someone looking to compare specific majors to see how
they may affect income.
Computer science was the highest paying major without any controls,
but engineering was
ranked first after controlling for all of the variables.
VI. Conclusion
The results of this paper show that grades, math ability, and
choice of major are all very
important. Students should work hard in school, learn math, and
consider income when
choosing a major. Since having a higher GPA leads to higher levels
of income immediately after
graduation, students may benefit financially from taking easier
classes in order to get better
grades. This is because employers often use GPA as part of the
screening process for employees.
However, taking more challenging classes may help a student develop
more human capital which
would increase productivity. Thus, in the long run there may be
benefits to taking more
challenging courses. Ideally, a student will take challenging
classes and get good grades, so they
will benefit as much as possible from their education. Working hard
in school will very likely
lead to higher pay after graduation.
The results showed that math ability is more important in
increasing earnings than verbal
ability. This means that students should consider spending more
time developing their math and
problem solving skills. By improving math ability, a student can
make significantly more
28
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
29
money. The results also suggest that math courses should be more
strongly emphasized in
school. By increasing the math and problem solving skills of our
society, it is possible we will
become more productive. Math and science leads to most new
technology, which is vital in
enabling our economy to continue to grow.
This paper has found that some majors pay better than others even
after controlling for
ability. The results also showed the wage differentials between the
various majors. This
information is very useful for college students. Many college
students choose their major
without knowing the affect each major has on income. This paper
will enable students to make
more informed decisions when deciding what they want to study. The
results suggest that if a
student has no preference for occupation, they should choose the
highest paying major,
engineering. If a student has personal preferences for certain
majors or occupations, then they
must decide how much income they are willing to sacrifice in order
to enter their preferred field.
Also, since the earnings from each major vary greatly, a student
must consider the risk involved
with each major as well as whether or not they believe they will be
successful in a field. A
student will not necessarily earn more in highest paying field
based on these regressions.
It is important that there is a significant interaction between
math ability and major. This
suggests that the highest paying major may depend on an
individual’s abilities. Someone who
struggles with math, for example, most likely should not choose
math as a major even if it pays
higher on average. One student may make the most money as an
engineer, while another may
make the most by choosing political science. A student can compare
the amount of earnings
they will forgo to the wage differential and risk for each major in
order to make the optimal
decision. Students must keep in mind both the salary associated
with each major as well as the
29
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
30
demands of the occupations associated with it. Hopefully, students
will choose the right major
based on these results.
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
31
References
Arcidiacono, Peter. “Ability sorting and the returns to college
major.” Journal of
Econometrics. July-August 2004, 121(1-2), pp. 343-375.
Becker, Gary S. Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis
with Special Reference
To Education. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1993.
Boissiere, M., Knight, J.B., and Sabot, R.H. “Earnings, Schooling,
Ability, and
Cognitive Skills.” The American Economic Review. Dec. 1985, 75
(5),
pp. 1016-1030.
Chia, Grace and Miller, Paul W. “Tertiary Performance, Field of
Study, and Graduate
Starting Salaries. The Australian Economic Review. 2008, 41 (1),
pp. 15-31.
Gerhart, Barry A. “Gender Differences in Current and Starting
Salaries: The Role of
Performance, College Major, and Job Title.” Center for Advanced
Human
Resource Studies. 1988, pp. 2-16.
Rumberger, Russel. “The Economic Returns to College Major, Quality,
and Performance: A
Multilevel Analysis of Recent Graduates.” Economics of Education
Review. March
1993, 12 (1), pp. 2-16.
Scholz, Dan. “Risk Associated With Different College Majors.”
Illinois Wesleyan
University: Senior Honors Project, 1996.
Smart, John C. “College influences on graduates’ income levels.”
Research in
Higher Education. September 1988, 29 (1), pp. 41-59.
Thomas, Scott L. “Deferred Costs and Economic Returns to College
Major, Quality, and
Performance.” Research in Higher Education, June 2000, 41 (3), pp.
281-313.
Thomas, Scott L. and Zhang, Liang. “Post-Baccalaureate Wage Growth
within Four
Years of Graduation: The Effects of College Quality and College
Major.”
Research in Higher Education. June 2005, 46 (4), pp. 437-459.
31
Published by Digital Commons @ IWU, 2009
32
Thorson, Amanda. “The Effect of College Major on Wages.” Illinois
Wesleyan
University: Senior Honors Project, 2005.
Wise, David A. “Academic Achievement and Job Performance.” The
American
Economic Review. June 1975, 65 (3), pp. 350-366.
32
Undergraduate Economic Review, Vol. 5 [2009], Iss. 1, Art. 7
http://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/uer/vol5/iss1/7
Paul Oehrlein
Recommended Citation
Abstract